So if you don't spank....what do you do? - Page 5

[peaceful_mama]

Originally Posted by heartmama

I love ds unconditionally, but I do not love and accept all of his behavior unconditionally. There is a difference, and learning this distinction is a key part of healthy relationships as we grow up. I think stopping a behavior because it offends people, and makes them not want to be near you, is a good reason to stop this kind of behavior (spitting in a person's face). In my experience, ds did not feel unloved, he felt like I was being real with him. I agree, we need to be teaching--and it may be semantics or just perception as to which part of a response is teaching vs. punitive.

VERY well said. This is how I feel about my kids....I love them unconditionally and BECAUSE of that, I want to teach them how to behave in ways that will help them be accepted and loved by others.

[tracysroberts]

I would like to recommend Unconditional Parenting by Alfie Kohn for you frustrated mamas.

[sgmom]

Originally Posted by Theoretica

Maybe I'm not being clear or something? I didn't suggest punishing the child? I said if the child is allowed to not be around someone that treats them badly (I would hope that's encouraged, at least), what is wrong with the gma in this situation saying "I don't want to play w/you, you spit on me" and then leaving the immediate area of the child? It's a natural reaction to not want to be around someone who acts like that and the child then learns not to treat people accordingly.

Just to clarify, I wasn't speaking to, or about you at all. I was speaking in general about those who remove the spitter from the situation as punishment for spitting. If your goal is to teach that spitting on someone makes the other not want to be around you though, then would it not make more sense to remove the person who was spat upon? "I'm sorry that you got spit on. That wasn't very nice. Let's take a break from playing and go clean you up." That doesn't really make much sense to me at all (as I would think it would be rather self-rewarding for the spitter), but it's late and this thread has gone somewhat out of control. LOL

Based on what you're saying about the natural consequences...

[peaceful_mama]

Originally Posted by mamazee

It isn't about justifying. It's about listening. "Wow, you were really angry. What made you so angry?" Ifs he doesn't want to talk about it, fine, but she might want to be heard.

I'd likely stop at the first line...DD is the type who will follow that sort of thing with a "yeah" or "no" If she said nothing else, I might ask her if she wanted to talk about it.

I'm on the fence on whether saying "What made you angry?" and "WHY are you angry?" (like "you shouldn't be") are the same thing...

I don't know *why* that is such a big thing in my mind, making sure she, or my other two, don't feel like they have to justify their emotions to me. I guess that is part of ME never being "heard."

And not punishing doesn't mean "excusing" and it certainly doesn't have anything to do with encouraging. Encouraging would be, "Wow, great mouth muscles! That was some spitting!" Something positive done in an attempt to make it continue.

Hmmm true that on the encouraging.

I'm still working on this whole idea of not punishing yet not *excusing.* It's a whole new idea to me, as it's certainly NOT what I was raised on, and what I was told to do even in daycare and preschool was basically various forms of punishment, mostly time-out, removal of privileges, "if you do XYZ, you can no longer play with ZYX" type stuff, rewards for some and not others, you get the idea. (There were, however, *some* other methods, like seating certain children near you or apart from certain other children to avoid problems, things like that.)

This is an educational thread for me, and I see lots of ideas here that I think *do* fit the idea of "not excusing" but not *punishing* behavior. I will be trying these out the next time something happens that warrants it.

Also, stopping someone from running through the library screaming isn't the same as putting someone in a room after she spat at someone and is no longer spitting. If she were running around spitting on everyone, I'd move her to protect other people, but if she spat one time and stopped, putting her in her room isn't stopping her from spitting. The spitting is over. It's just a punishment.

True that. It was a one-time spit in response to being removed. So the spitting is done. She now needs a response that teaches that this is *unacceptable* and I think one of the least effective of these would be an isolated time-out.

Let's see...."isolated" no interaction with anyone to give her any sort of input as to what's happened and what was wrong.

And she's already angry, that's WHY she spit. Given that this is my daughter, trying to force her to stay in a time-out spot is going to make her MORE angry.

AND when *I* try to put her in time-out, she does not stay there. It turns into this prolonged power-struggle thing which results in tons of attention for her and totally shifts the focus off of what she did and onto this power struggle.

So...what I *wanted* to do was make sure she learns that spitting on someone is absolutely NOT acceptable no matter what that person just did. (She is THREE, let's save any possible escape-from-attacker scenes and all that. Let's stick to everyday-living scenarios with people she lives with.)

What I just succeeded in doing was engaging in a power struggle, giving her tons of extra attention (negative attention is still attention) and made her *more* angry....anger is not a frame of mind conducive to *learning.* And by the time we're done fighting about her staying in this time-out, we've probably BOTH forgotten what started this!

Yeah, I think there's more effective methods out there....methods that address her behavior without doing all of this!

[peaceful_mama]

Originally Posted by Theoretica

I don't understand the problem with natural consequences? The natural consequence of treating someone poorly is they don't want to be around you for the moment. A three year old feels the same way when a playmate hits them, spits on them, rips a toy away, whatever. I'd validate and encourage that decision from THEM to say "I don't want to play with this person who treated me badly" so what's wrong with it going the other way too?

I want my children to be comfortable setting and enforcing their own boundaries, specifically regarding what treatment they will tolerate from others. I teach this by respecting boundaries in others, and pointing out to my child that their behaviors can impact how others feel about them. To do otherwise, in my opinion, is unfair to my child and sets them up with unrealistic expectations about how their world, and eventually the real world, works.

ABSOLUTELY! If I would tell my 3 year old it's perfectly OK for her to say "I don't want to play with you right now!" to someone who is being mean to her, then what is wrong with Grandma walking away from her, going to wash her face, even saying "I'm going to go do something else for awhile until we're both not angry anymore." (and then of course that is the truth, when Grandma comes back, they make up.)
What better way could there possibly be for someone to learn the consequences of her actions, and that sometimes you just need to leave someone alone for a little while until they are ready to hear your apology?

If we were talking about two siblings in this scenario, I don't think anyone here would say it would be wrong for the "spit on" child to walk away and not want to be around the "spitter" for awhile.

Just because this is an adult and the one doing the spitting is a 3 year old does not mean the adult should pretend that their feelings were not hurt, or that they were not disgusted, or whatever the case might be.

In fact, that right there, in my mind is the best way my daughter could *learn*, from actually living through and talking about the true consequences of her actions. ("I want to go watch TV in Grandma's room." "Well, dear, Grandma went in to be alone because she was angry about you spitting on her...." "Oh, I could tell her I'm sorry...." apologies, hugs, scenario done.)

As long as it is a *true* scenario reflecting *authentic* feelings and reactions, and not something where anyone is playing out a scene to "teach a child a lesson."

[peaceful_mama]

The upshot of this whole nearly 100 post discussion?

I've figured out something that will probably carry us through *many* situations in life.

I've seen the 'light' that spanking obviously does not teach anything, that's why I came with a post like this. Because I want another response.

I am actually pretty glad isolation doesn't work with this child...because it really doesn't *teach* anything either, especially in a situation like this.

If I could replay this particular scenario....here's what I would want to do and why.

I would want MY MOM to be the one to take the time away from DD. (which she would want to do)

Why? Well, because when somebody treats you like that, you *don't* want to be around them. It doesn't matter if you are 3 or 103, doesn't matter if the person doing it to you is 3 or 103, you don't want to be around a person who is being mean to you. I think this is the best way for someone to learn what kind of treatment you're going to accept from them.

And DD is going to hear whatever needs to be heard much better from me, a person who she is not angry with at the moment.

The first thing she's going to hear, the minute I step between them, (and I would, you'd have to know these two to know that I as parent need to step into this scene and take over if I want it to go non-punishment-like) is a firm "We DO NOT spit on people!" Boundary drawn. From there, Grandma has left the room, and DD and I can talk about what happened and better reactions.

I almost guarantee that within a few minutes of Grandma being alone in her room, DD will want something from her. Which would give us an opportunity to talk about why Grandma went to be away from her and what she can do to help Grandma know that she is sorry and want to be around her again. (she *would* be sorry, she's sweet and doesn't *want* to hurt anyone, she is THREE and doesn't think ahead when she's overcome by anger and frustration at not being able to do something she wants to do)

I think this gives her an opportunity to interact and *learn from* this situation, and that it addresses the behavior at hand without imposing anything 'fake.'

And it avoids the power-struggle that *is* me attempting to use time-out with her. Don't ask me why it works for her dad and not for me, doesn't matter, *I* need to do what works between her and me.

*my mom* would likely think I've not really "done anything" but that is her problem. She had her chance, this is mine.

[mamazee]

Originally Posted by claddaghmom

Ok but thinking of the toddlers I have known...wouldn't that have the risk of encouraging spitting? I've found a bit of "eww" or "oww!" to entice giggling and repeats.

I don't know...maybe in this situation w/ the 3yo particularly doing it out of anger...it wouldn't cause this?

A natural consequence isn't an attempt to teach or not to teach, it is what happens naturally. Simply what happens if no one forces anything. If you are talkign about a consequence someone makes happen intended to teach, your'e talking about a punishment, not a natural consequence.

[tracysroberts]

Originally Posted by mamazee

A natural consequence isn't an attempt to teach or not to teach, it is what happens naturally. Simply what happens if no one forces anything. If you are talkign about a consequence someone makes happen intended to teach, your'e talking about a punishment, not a natural consequence.

From 15 years and a masters degree in Child Development.... Absolutely!

Once again, I think Unconditional Parenting is a must read for all parents.

[aloharuiz]

I think it is hard not to punish a kid especially when you know that what he or she did was really bad. Sometimes I get tempted to spank my 6 year old kid when he talks back. But never did I lay a hand on my him because I know that aside from discipline, I will be teaching him cruelty too.

___________________
Fat binder | Hunger suppressants | Slimming tablets | Hoodia appetite suppressant

[sgmom]

Originally Posted by peaceful_mama

The first thing she's going to hear, the minute I step between them, (and I would, you'd have to know these two to know that I as parent need to step into this scene and take over if I want it to go non-punishment-like) is a firm "We DO NOT spit on people!" Boundary drawn. From there, Grandma has left the room, and DD and I can talk about what happened and better reactions.

I almost guarantee that within a few minutes of Grandma being alone in her room, DD will want something from her. Which would give us an opportunity to talk about why Grandma went to be away from her and what she can do to help Grandma know that she is sorry and want to be around her again. (she *would* be sorry, she's sweet and doesn't *want* to hurt anyone, she is THREE and doesn't think ahead when she's overcome by anger and frustration at not being able to do something she wants to do)

I think this gives her an opportunity to interact and *learn from* this situation, and that it addresses the behavior at hand without imposing anything 'fake.'

And it avoids the power-struggle that *is* me attempting to use time-out with her. Don't ask me why it works for her dad and not for me, doesn't matter, *I* need to do what works between her and me.

*my mom* would likely think I've not really "done anything" but that is her problem. She had her chance, this is mine.

Well said!! I'm really glad this thread happened. You really seem to have a good grasp at how gentle parenting works.